1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

purport, purport, and.

1. The court of first instance dismissed all of the Plaintiff’s claim on the principal lawsuit, dismissed the part of the Defendant’s claim on the design service cost, and dismissed all of the remainder of the counterclaim.

Accordingly, the judgment of the court of first instance is limited to the claims of the plaintiff's objection, since only the plaintiff appealed against the claims of the court of first instance.

2. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited is as follows, and except for the addition of Paragraph 3 to the judgment on the assertion emphasized by the plaintiff in this court, the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment. Thus, this is cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of

" September 16, 2010" at the bottom of two pages shall be changed to " September 15, 2010".

From 3 pages 3 up to 5, the phrase “afterward” shall be as follows:

“F thereafter filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for the payment of the construction cost on June 2, 2016 (Seoul Eastern District Court 2016da18549), but the said judgment was finalized on December 6, 2016, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on January 10, 2017. F did not deliver documents necessary for the Plaintiff’s application for the approval of use to the effect that it lost the lawsuit. F did not deliver to the Plaintiff any documents necessary for the Plaintiff’s application for the approval of use.” At the bottom of 3rd part of the same “F”, at the bottom of 3rd part, the term “the Plaintiff received at the bottom of 5” until

In the existing building permit on August 24, 2015 with the Defendant’s aid, under the previous building permit, the location of the site is from “D and seven lots,” to “D and other six lots,” and the purpose of use is from “n and children’s facilities (child-care centers, churches, religious facilities (g) and religious facilities (g)” to “ religious facilities (g)”, and the building area is changed from “768.72m2m2,” to “520.07m2,” respectively, with the construction permission changed from “768m2” to “520.07m2, the Plaintiff received at the bottom of 3m2 at the bottom of the lower part of “3”.

On November 17, 2015, the Plaintiff, as the Defendant’s aid, is in accordance with the construction change permit, and the construction area was modified from “520.07 square meters” to “342.47 square meters,” and the construction area was modified to “342.47 square meters,” and “intersections and “gents” in two parallels.